On 3/16/22 8:53 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 08:42:56PM +0800, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
On 3/16/22 7:02 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 04:56:11PM +0800, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
Hi,
I just found the commit in 5.10 stable kernel.
stable-linux> git tag --sort=taggerdate --contain
8a3fc32b322cc3081dd3569047c9834f496b4ab0 | head -1
v5.10.17
commit 8a3fc32b322cc3081dd3569047c9834f496b4ab0
Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu Feb 4 18:25:37 2021 +0100
cpufreq: ACPI: Extend frequency tables to cover boost frequencies
commit 3c55e94c0adea4a5389c4b80f6ae9927dd6a4501 upstream.
[ ... ]
Fixes: 41ea667227ba ("x86, sched: Calculate frequency invariance for AMD
systems")
Fixes: 976df7e5730e ("x86, sched: Use midpoint of max_boost and max_P
for frequency invariance on AMD EPYC")
Fixes: db865272d9c4 ("cpufreq: Avoid configuring old governors as
default with intel_pstate")
Except db865272d9c4 was applied in v5.10-rc2, the others (41ea667227ba and
976df7e5730e)
were first appeared in v5.11-rc1.
linux> git tag --sort=taggerdate --contain 41ea667227ba | head -1
v5.11-rc1
linux> git tag --sort=taggerdate --contain 976df7e5730e | head -1
v5.11-rc1
linux> git tag --sort=taggerdate --contain db865272d9c4 | head -1
v5.10-rc2
So I am wondering if the mentioned commit is suitable for 5.10 stable
kernel, or what am I missing?
Is it causing a problem for you? What is the issue with having it in
the 5.10.y tree?
No.
I am trying to port 41ea667227ba and relevant commits to our kernel which
is based on 5.10 stable kernel, and I am being asked to port 3c55e94c0ade
per the fix tag after 41ea667227ba was added, then I was confused because
of conflict.
Don't "port" stable kernels, just do a normal merge and then all is much
better. That way you do not miss patches you should have applied but
didn't realize until much later...
Thanks for the tip and also the effort for stable kernel maintenance!
Thanks,
Guoqing
